Comment on Trendler’s (2019) “Conjoint measurement undone”

5Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Most of Trendler’s (2019) article, “Conjoint measurement undone,” seems wrong to us. We explain why we disagree completely with two of his assertions: (a) that cardinal measurement scales are absent in psychology and (b) that psychology has stagnated. We share three of his other concerns, but not his perspectives on them or the supposed links among them. These three points are: (a) fewer applications of additive conjoint measurement than initially expected, (b) flaws in the practice of statistics, and (c) need to improve the culture of replication in psychology. We provide our views on these points and also note two distinct strands in the foundational analysis of measurement—one derived from geometry, the other from probability. Trendler completely overlooked the latter.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Krantz, D. H., & Wallsten, T. S. (2019, February 1). Comment on Trendler’s (2019) “Conjoint measurement undone.” Theory and Psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318815767

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free